The Indian villages
of Maracaibo were seen in 1499 and reminded Alonso de Ojeda of
Venice, hence the name: Little Venice. Settlement by Spaniards
began in 1523. But the Spaniards did not penetrate the interior
until later and the country was controlled from Santo Domingo
and later from Bogota. The coast was disputed with the Dutch
(who captured and ruled the islands of Curacao, Aruba and Bonaire)
and the English (who captured and ruled Trinidad). The whole
country was only weakly controlled by Spain. There was a society
of Spanish speakers which included the elite and a mixed race
class of Mestizos as well as black slaves and the Indians of
the interior.

Independence movements gained power during the Napoleonic
wars when Spain itself had been conquered. The war of independence
which lasted for ten years destroyed much of the country. From
1821 to 1830 Venezuela was part of Greater Colombia with Ecuador
and Colombia. Venezuela broke away in 1830. There followed a
period of authoritarian
government dominated by the land owning class. Dictatorships
and military rule were common. There were several civil wars.
During the first half of the 20th century there was a series
of strong military dictators. The situation was similar to several
of the Central American states in recent times. Oil was first
exploited in the 1930s.

Only with the oil wealth did the country become a modern state.
Modern politics began after the second world war. However the
last military dictatorship, of Perez Jiminez, was from 1948 until
1958. Since then there have been governments elected constitutionally
and parties have alternated in office. Military coups since then
have been unsuccessful which suggests that the country has become
less vulnerable to military takeover. The wealth from oil, especially
since 1973, paid for national development including education
but increasing poverty is reversing that. There is a not very
active dispute with Guyana inherited from the dispute with Britain.
A non-military regime has less need to activate this dispute.

The Presidency and ruling party has changed regularly since
1958. Military takeover is now thought unlikely. But the fall
in oil prices after a boom period put strains on the political
system. There is a rapidly growing population which is a potential
instability if people continue to flock to the capital without
jobs. There was an attempted coup in early 1992, but it did not
show much chance of success. Another attempted coup, with fighting,
in November 1992 indicated growing instability. In 1993 the president
was made to resign after accusations of corruption, then under
house arrest: a useful precedent.

Hardly anyone voted (20% in Caracas in the 1993 election)
which suggests the people felt the existing political parties
were in fact no more than an oligarchy of the rich. As in the
United States voter apathy implied that democracy was not the
right word for the system.

The recent president, Hugo Chavez, had been earlier imprisoned
for an attempted military coup, and on election brought in a
new constitution. He said his intention was to give more influence
to ordinary people. He calls his policy the Bolivarian Revolution.
However, others feared he just the latest in a line of Caudillos.
His meetings with Fidel Castro, Muammar Ghadafi and Saddam Hussein
create hostility with the US. His alliance with Evo Morales in
Bolivia threatens the US power in South America.

In April 2002 there were demonstrations (probably by the wealthy,
prompted by the US) against his rule and several people were
killed. The military moved to make him resign. Two days later
he was back after demonstrations in the streets.

In December 2002 bigger demonstrations were seen on the streets.
Does this show the US using the same techniques employed against
Salvador Allende in Chile? Chavez did not resign.

A petition for a recall referendum was accepted by the Supreme
Court in June 2004. Chavez was re-elected by a large margin.
What will the US try next? He has already survived the Perkins
technique.

In January 2007 he was voted powers of governing by decree
for 18 months by the Assembly. As the opposition boycotted the
last assembly elections he has 100% support in the assembly.

In December 2007 he called a referendum to change the constitution
and allow the president to have more terms. This looked ominously
like an attempt to make himself president for life with a Single
Party.

There seemed to be genuine local opposition to this and the
referendum was lost with 51% to the opposition and 49% for.

Chavez was very hostile to the United States and all its works. No doubt he believed that US would like to see him out of office - dead or alive.

Oil country, rich while oil prices remain high, member of
OPEC. But the oil prices declined after the 1970s boom. Was the
profit sensibly invested? No, of course not.

Now oil prices are high again and Chavez seems determined
to let the poor see the benefit. The US government does not like
this.

The United States wants the introduction of a free market
economy. Will this increase poverty still more? If so, instability
is likely.

Hugo Chavez has reactivated OPEC (founded by Venezuela) which
helped to bring about the rise in oil price during the year 2000.

He is sending cheap oil to Cuba in return for Cuban doctors
and has offered it to the poor of the United States for winter
heating. He seems likely to build up a bloc of countries indebted
to his generosity. He has plans to build a gas pipeline to cover
the whole of South America.

At a recent price of oil ($120+ per barrel) the reserves
of very heavy oil become economic to exploit (they need refining
to be able to use). Chavez claims that this would give Venezuela
larger reserves than Saudi Arabia.

Chavez probably illustrates the idea that democracy and oil production don't go together. As long as the price is high he can indulge in many policies that might be opposed if taxpayers had to finance them.

Is the non-oil economy successful? There are reports of shortages of consumer products, and interference in the price mechanism. Chavez appeared not to understand economics.

The legacy of Chavez.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/14978-vaya-con-dios-hugo-chavez-mi-amigo"